I Agree with you on this but i have my own problems too. I have about 6 years experience on working with Java Web Frameworks. such as Struts, JSF , WebWorks...
I found that Tapestry (especially T5) is Much Better than others, but its development process is so slow and unpredictable. I think that is because of focusing varies things instead of just a little but efficient web framework. if you take a look at Spring, you will find that it is very simple and efficient in service layer. it has very nice and simple integration with Hibernate, JPA and other ORMs. just in presentation layer, there is no good tools or framework here. I think tapestry could be a great Framework here. if it focus on this layer and increase its development speed. lack of documents, tutorials and IDE support is Tapestry problems too. On Dec 26, 2007 3:12 PM, Chris Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I couldn't disagree with you more. For people like you who are familiar > with spring, you may think the ioc part of T5 is a waste of time. That > makes sense if you use and are happy with spring. For people like me > it's a completely different story. I have been working with java for > years - on the desktop. I've been doing web work for almost as long and > have specifically avoided java because its approach has always seemed > far too heavy, restrictive, and ungraceful for web development. I > briefly looked at a framework here and there over the years because I > enjoyed java as a language, but each time I resorted to another > technology because each one I looked at made me laugh. Granted I was a > bit naive at the time, but still I had to wonder if those framework > developers actually developed web sites/applications with their > frameworks, or instead thought it would be funny to see how many poor > suckers would fall into the tangle of complications they created. > Recently a project I stepped into reached a point of critical mass, and > using java made sense even if complicated. I resolved to find a > framework that, while maybe more complicated than I prefer, would > prevent me from succumbing to my urges to hang myself in the shower. > This is getting long so I'll cut it short. Getting started with T5 was > easy, as I am familiar with maven and eclipse. The docs are still a > little lacking, but I'm not afraid of source code or contributing code > and/or articles. As I'm not familiar with spring I don't share your > perspective. I loath the (ab/mis)use of xml that has been happening for > years, especially in 'enterprise' environments, so I never got into > spring. I am not bashing it as I can't rightfully judge something I > haven't used, but I can say that starting w/ T5 was cake, and I see no > hole that needs filling by something like spring. > Again this is my perspective - use what works best for you. > > chris > > Mohammad Shamsi wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > > > With this abilities that all we know about Frameworks like Spring, > > > > is there any need to Tapestry Focus on providing Hibernate Integration > Tools > > or Tapestry IOC ? > > > > i read Howards Documents about need for new Ioc for Tapestry, but i > still > > think that using Spring Ioc and Spring XML files is much easier than > coding > > it with Java Code > > > > On Dec 26, 2007 1:35 PM, Arve Klev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> T5 + Spring is in my opinion a very good choose. I let Spring integrate > >> ORM > >> (Hibernate, JDBC, TopLink, etc). > >> > >> sincerely, Arve Klev > >> > >> 2007/12/24, Mohammad Shamsi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> i want to start new Java EE projecct, Formerly we used Spring + > Struts > >>> > >> in > >> > >>> our projects. > >>> after about 4 month testing and reading about Tapestry 5, i decide to > >>> > >> use > >> > >>> Tapestry 5 instead of Struts. > >>> > >>> i read some limitations of tapestry-spring module in its home page > and > >>> > >> i > >> > >>> have no problem with them. > >>> > >>> is it any other limitation in using T5 + Spring ? > >>> > >>> does anyone have experience in T5 + Spring ? > >>> -- > >>> sincerely yours > >>> M. H. Shamsi > >>> > >>> > > > > > > > > > > -- sincerely yours M. H. Shamsi
